United States

Latest story

125 Shares96 Views

Europe Braces for Trump: ‘Worst Economic Nightmare Has Come True’

by

The United States is the biggest trading partner for the European Union and Britain, whose economies could be at risk from the president-elect’s policies.The outlook for Europe’s economy has been disappointing.Last week — after Donald J. Trump’s presidential election — it got worse.Deep uncertainty about the Trump administration’s policies on trade, technology, Ukraine, climate change and more is expected to chill investment and hamstring growth. The launch of a possible tariff war by the United States, the biggest trading partner and closest ally of the European Union and Britain, would hammer major industries like automobiles, pharmaceuticals and machinery.And the need to raise military spending because of doubts about America’s guarantees in Europe would further strain national budgets and increase deficits.In addition, the president-elect’s more confrontational attitude toward China could pressure Europe to pick sides or face retribution.“Europe’s worst economic nightmare has come true,” said Carsten Brzeski, chief economist at the Dutch bank ING. The developments, he warned, could push the eurozone into “a full-blown recession” next year.With political turmoil in Germany and France, Europe’s two largest economies, this latest blow could hardly come at a worse time.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

More stories

  • 138 Shares132 Views

    in Economy

    Another Jolt of Uncertainty for a Global Economy Mired in It

    by

    The U.S. presidential election result has ensured a sharp turn in economic policy expected to upend global commerce and diverge from decades of American norms.The U.S. presidential election is over. What remains is a disorienting miasma of fresh economic uncertainty.Despite reams of campaign proposals, just how President-elect Donald J. Trump’s administration will handle policy decisions that are crucial to the global economy’s path — on trade, technology, climate, industrial policy and more — is still unclear.Meanwhile, pre-election sources of instability keep spinning. War rumbles on in Ukraine. Escalating conflict in the Middle East could reignite a rise in food and energy prices. China, a vital engine of global growth, is trying to resuscitate its flattened economy. Many poor and middle-income countries face an unscalable wall of debt.Increasing bouts of extreme weather continue to destroy crops, wreck cities and swell the flow of migrants from economically devastated regions. And advances in artificial intelligence are poised to eliminate, create and reconfigure tens of millions of jobs.Then there is the hangover from the pandemic. Philip N. Jefferson, the vice chair of the Federal Reserve, has said policymakers are still trying to understand the economic aftereffects of this “once-in-a-century disturbance of worldwide consequence.”Inflation, in particular, has become harder to predict in the pandemic’s aftermath as political and military tensions have risen, he noted.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 175 Shares166 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Factory Towns Laid Low by the ‘China Shock’ Are Benefiting From New Investments

    by

    Communities that suffered the worst of plant closings in recent decades are now gaining an outsize share of fresh investment and new jobs.For much of the last half century, economic life in the heart of North Carolina has been dominated by factory closings, joblessness and downgraded expectations. Textile mills and furniture plants have been undercut by low-priced imports from Mexico and China. Tobacco processing jobs have disappeared.Yet over the last several years, an infusion of investment in cutting-edge industries like biotechnology, computer chips and electric vehicles has lifted the fortunes of long-struggling communities.North Carolina presents a conspicuous example of this trend, yet a similar story is playing out elsewhere. From industrial swaths of the Midwest to factory towns in the South, areas that suffered the most wrenching downsides of trade are now capturing the greatest shares of investment into forward-tilting industries, according to research from the Brookings Institution, a public policy research organization in Washington.As furniture manufacturing and textile jobs vanished, Chatham County, N.C., suffered the consequences for decades.Sebastian Siadecki for The New York TimesThe Plant in Pittsboro, N.C., is home to a variety of small businesses and includes outdoor event spaces and restaurants.Sebastian Siadecki for The New York TimesBrookings researchers examined pledges of private investment across the United States, using data compiled by the Biden administration as part of its campaign to subsidize domestic production of computer chips and electric vehicles. They also tapped a Massachusetts Institute of Technology database that tracks investments in clean energy. Over the last three years, $736 billion in investment has been promised for these key industries, the researchers found.When they mapped the investments, the Brookings team concluded that nearly a third of the total is flowing into communities that experienced the worst effects of the so-called China Shock — the factory closures that followed China’s entry to the global trading system in 2001.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 138 Shares156 Views

    in Economy

    Polls Show Trump’s Edge Shrinking on Voters’ Top Issue: The Economy

    by

    It remains priority No. 1 for many voters, particularly those who are still undecided, according to Times/Siena polling. But can Kamala Harris translate her gains into votes?The economy is still the No. 1 issue in the presidential election. Voters rated it as their top priority in the latest New York Times/Siena College poll, as they have in every Times/Siena poll this year.And while former President Donald J. Trump remains the more trusted candidate in terms of handling the economy, Vice President Kamala Harris has closed much of the gap.Ms. Harris is in an unusual position, running as a sitting vice president alongside an unpopular president. Many voters say President Biden’s policies have hurt them — more than say the same about Mr. Trump’s policies — and economic concerns are a large driver of those feelings, recent polls show.Large majorities of voters rate the economy as only fair or poor, even though inflation has cooled and many other traditional indicators are positive. (Though experts note that concerns about inflation often linger, even as inflation rates lower.)But Ms. Harris has made some gains on the economy. In a September Times/Siena poll, likely voters favored Mr. Trump’s handling of the economy by 13 percentage points; that lead had shrunk to just six percentage points in the latest Times/Siena poll, which was conducted last week. Other pollsters have shown similar gains for the vice president on the issue.

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    Regardless of how you might vote, do you trust Kamala Harris or Donald Trump to do a better job on the economy?
    Notes: Question wording has been condensed. Margins are calculated using unrounded percentages. Sources: New York Times/Siena College surveys among likely voters conducted Sept. 3 to 6, 2024; Sept. 11 to 16, 2024; and Oct. 20 to 23, 2024. By The New York TimesMost currently view the economy negativelyThinking about the nation’s economy, how would you rate economic conditions today?

    Notes: Among registered voters. Question wording varies slightly by pollster. Sources: Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, ABC News, Bloomberg News, Consumer Comfort Index: State of the Economy, SSRS, NORC, Washington Post, New York Times/Siena College.By The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares91 Views

    in Economy

    Can Democrats Win Back Voters From Trump on Trade Policy?

    by

    The Biden administration has pursued a big shift in trade policy, but it’s not clear whether that will be enough to win votes.Since Donald J. Trump won over many working-class voters in 2016 with his vows to impose tariffs and rework “disastrous” trade deals, Democrats have been scrambling to win back supporters by taking a more protectionist trade approach.Over the last four years, the Biden administration spent more time emphasizing the harm trade policy has caused to American communities than the benefits. It hit the brakes on negotiating trade deals with other countries and chose to maintain and even increase Mr. Trump’s tariffs on Chinese products. And it pumped billions of dollars into new American factories to make semiconductors and solar panels.It’s a significant shift from the decades that both mainstream Democrats and Republicans spent working to promote trade and lower international barriers.For Vice President Kamala Harris, next week’s election will be a moment of truth for whether the strategy worked.Mr. Trump has helped bring trade to the forefront in presidential elections with his vitriolic criticisms of past policy and his proposals for high tariffs. It is an issue that resonates strongly with voters in Northern swing states like Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, where manufacturing employment fell steeply in recent decades as factories moved abroad.Biden officials have been trying to persuade more trade-skeptical voters that their policies to encourage manufacturing in the United States are working, pointing to a recent surge in U.S. factory construction.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 113 Shares168 Views

    in Economy

    G.M.’s Electric Vehicle Sales Surge as Ford Loses Billions

    by

    Ford is struggling to make money on battery-powered models while General Motors, which started more slowly, says it is getting close to that goal.In the race to be second to Tesla in the U.S. electric vehicle market, Ford Motor leaped to an early lead four years ago over its crosstown rival, General Motors, with the Mustang Mach E, an electric sport utility vehicle with a design and a name that nodded to its classic sports car.But the contest looks much different today.Sales of G.M.’s battery-powered models are starting to surge as the company begins to reap its big investments in standardized batteries and new factories. Ford’s three electric models, including the F-150 Lightning pickup truck and a Transit van, are still selling well but are racking up billions of dollars of losses.The latest view into how Ford’s quick-start strategy has run into trouble came on Monday, when the company reported that its electric vehicle division lost $1.2 billion before interest and taxes from July to September. In the first nine months of the year, it lost $3.7 billion.Ford’s chief financial officer, John Lawler, said it was a “solid quarter,” noting that revenue had risen for the 10th quarter in a row, by 5 percent to $46.2 billion. But the company’s overall profit of $896 million in the third quarter was down 24 percent from a year earlier, largely because of problems with electric vehicles, warranty costs and other factors.“Our strategic advantages are not falling to the bottom line the way they should because of cost,” Mr. Lawler said.Ford made an early entry into the electric vehicle market compared to other established automakers with the Mustang Mach E.David Zalubowski/Associated PressWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 163 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    How Is the Economy for Black Voters? A Complex Question Takes Center Stage.

    by

    The 2024 election could be won or lost on the strength of the Black vote, which could in turn be won or lost based on the strength of the American economy. So it is no surprise that candidates are paying a lot of attention — and lip service — to which of the past two administrations did more to improve the lives of Black workers.Former President Donald J. Trump, the Republican candidate, makes big claims about the gains Black workers made under his watch, saying that he had the “lowest African American unemployment rate” and “the lowest African American poverty rate ever recorded.” But those measures improved even more under the Biden administration, with joblessness touching a record low and poverty falling even further.“Currently, Black workers are doing better than they were in 2019,” said Valerie Wilson, a labor economist whose work focuses on racial disparities at the liberal-leaning advocacy organization EPI Action.That may sound like an unambiguous victory for Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee, especially when paired with a recent increase in homeownership rates for Black families and the fact that the Black unemployment rate dipped in September.But even with those notable wins, the economy has not been uniformly good for all Black Americans. Rapid inflation has been tough on many families, chipping away at solid wage growth. Although the labor market for Black workers was the strongest ever recorded for much of 2022 and 2023, the long shadow of big price increases may be keeping people from feeling like they are getting ahead.In fact, nearly three in four Black respondents rated the economy as fair or poor, a recent New York Times/Siena College poll of Black likely voters found. And that is notable, because Black voters do tend to prioritize economic issues — not just for themselves, but also for the overall welfare of Black people — when they are thinking about whether and how to vote.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 175 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    Trump Brags About His Math Skills and Economic Plans. Experts Say Both Are Shaky.

    by

    In a combative interview, the former president hinted at even higher tariffs as an economic magic bullet.Former President Donald J. Trump has been offering up new tax cuts to nearly every group of voters that he meets in recent weeks, shaking the nerves of budget watchers and fiscal hawks who fear his expensive economic promises will explode the nation’s already bulging national debt.But on Tuesday, Mr. Trump made clear that he was unfazed by such concerns and offered a one-word solution: growth. Despite the doubts of economists from across the political spectrum, Mr. Trump said that he would just juice the economy by the force of his will and scoffed at suggestions that his pledges to abolish taxes on overtime, tips and Social Security benefits could cost as much as $15 trillion.“I was always very good at mathematics,” Mr. Trump told John Micklethwait, the editor in chief of Bloomberg News, in an interview at the Economic Club of Chicago.Faced with repeated questioning about how he could possibly grow the economy enough to pay for those tax cuts, Mr. Trump dismissed criticism of his ideas as misguided. He professed his love of tariffs and insisted that surging output would cover the cost of his plans.“We’re all about growth,” Mr. Trump said, adding that his mix of tax cuts and tariffs would force companies to invest in manufacturing in the United States.The national debt is approaching $36 trillion. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget projected last week that Mr. Trump’s economic agenda could cost as much as $15 trillion over a decade. Economists from the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a nonpartisan think tank, estimated last month that if Mr. Trump’s plans were enacted, the gross domestic product could be 9.7 percent lower than current forecasts, shrinking output and dampening consumer demand.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 138 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    E.V. Tax Credits Are a Plus, but Flaws Remain, Study Finds

    by

    The Inflation Reduction Act was a compromise between competing priorities. Evaluating the law on the effectiveness of the $7,500 tax credit for E.V.s is tricky.A team of economists has taken on a central component of the Inflation Reduction Act: the $7,500 tax credit for U.S.-made electric vehicles.The challenge in evaluating it is that the policy has sometimes conflicting goals. One is getting people to buy electric vehicles to lower carbon emissions and slow climate change. The other is strengthening U.S. auto manufacturing by denying subsidies to foreign companies, even for better or cheaper electric vehicles.That’s why totaling those pluses and minuses is complex, but overall the researchers found that Americans have seen a two-to-one return on their investment in the new electric vehicle subsidies. That includes environmental benefits, but mostly reflects a shift of profits to the United States. Before the climate law, tax credits were mainly used to buy foreign-made cars.“What the I.R.A. did was swing the pendulum the other way, and heavily subsidized American carmakers,” said Felix Tintelnot, an associate professor of economics at Duke University who was a co-author of the paper.Those benefits were undermined, however, by a loophole allowing dealers to apply the subsidy to leases of foreign-made electric vehicles. The provision sends profits to non-American companies, and since those foreign-made vehicles are on average heavier and less efficient, they impose more environmental and road-safety costs.Also, the researchers estimated that for every additional electric vehicle the new tax credits put on the road, about three other electric vehicle buyers would have made the purchases even without a $7,500 credit. That dilutes the effectiveness of the subsidies, which are forecast to cost as much as $390 billion through 2031. “The I.R.A. was worth the money invested,” said Jonathan Smoke, the chief economist at Cox Automotive, which provided some of the data used in the analysis. “But in essence, my conclusion is that we could do better.”How the Environmental and Safety Costs of Gas- and Electric-Powered Cars Stack UpMeasuring the cost to society of carbon emissions from driving and manufacturing, local air pollutants and the danger of crashes, a new economic analysis finds that some gas-powered vehicles are less damaging than electric and hybrid vehicles.

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    The five least and most costly gas- and electric-powered vehicles
    Averages are weighted by the number of each model registered within each powertrain category. Total costs subtract fiscal benefits from gas taxes and electricity bills.Source: Hunt Allcott, Stanford; Joseph Shapiro, U.C. Berkeley; Reigner Kane and Max Maydanchik, University of Chicago; and Felix Tintelnot, Duke UniversityBy The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More